REAL CHANGE OR LOOSE CHANGE

From the Iowa caucuses through the New Hampshire primary and beyond, it’s obvious what is even more challenging to the candidates than strategies on terrorism, the economy, health care, et al., is how to use this year’s magic word and/or concept: “change”. As was compiled by The New York Times in Iowa’s aftermath, the major candidates used the term a combined 29 times in addressing their faithful. Yet we in the electorate know little really does change after any election: we’re a capitalist world power with the complex challenges to match. So the question is again, which relatively few changes can realistically be made. And that noted, why doesn’t any politician offer this “change”: I’ll change the way we use “change” – I won’t splash the canvas, I’ll paint the canvas.
Of course, America needs changes and a candidate with the will to get at least some implemented but moreover, we need one with the judgement to know which ones are feasible. Too many intended changes that can’t be actualized will again let the people down and become political loose change.